I will start my argument by stating that after well over 50 years as a competitive lifter, coach, and gym owner, I have never seen a top-ranked bodybuilder, Olympic lifter, or serious track or football athlete doing low bar squats.

I think there are more nuances that aren't being discussed in the comparison of the two, and one of the most important and understated of these is the foot dorsiflexion demands/dorsiflexion adaptations that the high bar requires/provides. And with that comes a ton of other "side-effects".

I think there are more nuances that aren't being discussed in the comparison of the two, and one of the most important and understated of these is the foot dorsiflexion demands/dorsiflexion adaptations that the high bar requires/provides. And with that comes a ton of other "side-effects".

Well I personally have never felt any quad strength improvement whatsoever in the months and years of low bar squatting. And this is a big thing because I always collapse at the knee, in both the one-leg and two-leg jump.

I might squat 160 kg low bar but my high bar squat is still at the same level as it ever was in the last 5 years or so (and I believe it's a strength issue, not a movement efficiency one).

a) it's very heavy (>> 2xbw, at least for reps, maybe 5, no belt)b) it is upright enough to involve significant contrib from quadsc) is assisted by other exercises for quads (eg front squats but there are others too)

otherwise it's not really gonna do much for ya, prob.

i can't do a textbook olympic squat due to anthropometry, mine is a middle of the road one, somewhere btw an olympic and a lowbar but closer to the latter, which is not ideal but i do ok if i front squat regularly in addition. I'd rather just have a kickass heavy highbar backsquat though, then i wouldnt bother with fronts but unfortunately i do have to do them, and even then it doesn't do a hell of a lot for me..

It's probably similar to mine's... but a high bar squat feels SO much more different to me than a low bar squat. So much more "leg" involvement if you will... I consider "leg" when I feel the quads fire well.

With the low bar squat I feel like I'm neglecting my quads just because the posterior chain has been overblown so much on the internet lately: low bar squat for the PC, RDLs for the PC, leg curls for the PC, glute ham raises for the PC, hip thrusts for the PC, reverse hypers for the PC, deadlifts for the PC... OK OK... but what about stuff for the QUADS? What about that?

I mean I would be fine with all the posterior chain work in the world if I knew I had a 2x+ high bar squat and that my quads were strong enough to amortizate any kind of plant or landing... but even when I play ball, I'm scared to penetrate because I know I would be able to pass my defender but I wouldn't be able to stop or control the plant or landing that would follow that penetration.

So I'm limited to just be a passer etc. That can't happen. You can't pretend to squat 160 kg low bar and then say you have too weak quads to do anything useful with them.

At least if I had a 2x high bar squat I could say it's not the quads - it's something else and address it. But in this case, I can't, because they really are too weak.

Well, my default squat is an ultra-high bar one and yet it is not that much quad. It does hit my VMOs but not much the 'outer' quads, while it hits hams and glutes a lot. And it is not a squatmorning one either.My, anecdotal bro-science, opinion is that bar position does not affect much. Lance said it in here some time ago, it was something like "do you really think that moving the bar a couple of inches lower can make a difference?". So, imho, each one should follow the bar position that 'suits' him better and allows him to move more weight.

I know what Lance said but I disagree. If that was the case, then two different squat styles would not even exist and the difference in poundages between the high and the low bar squat wouldn't exist either.

The thing with the low bar squat is it really depends MUCH more on the posterior chain, and the tibias travel far less forward (and thus requires much less ankle dorsiflexion to be available) and thus the quads get a much less loading effect.

Which is bad if that's the only thing you do for the quads.

If you were able to front squat and also do low bar squats, maybe it would make sense. But for someone in my position who can't do front squats, then a high bar squat makes more sense in my opinion.

It's not the small almost imperceptible change of bar position on the body which matters, it's the style of the squat all the way throughout the ROM of the movement. Lowbar and highbar placements might facilitate bottom positions that resemble, on one extreme the deep upright olympic squat and in the other extreme, the bent over barely parallel lowbar variant.

Fair points both. I am not saying they are the same, neither am i favoring one towards the other. I am saying that it is the person/metrics/idkwhat that determines which one is better for whom. And that i believe that deciding which form suits you better according to online specifications is wrong. If you feel better and your form is solid with a bar position, stay with it.

Real life example:

Raptor once again wants to change to high bar because he 'feels no quads' or something, so he is willing to sacrifice something like 20-30kg from his max, (he has tried many times and we know that he is 20-30kg weaker in high vs low bar).

While his low bar form is this bentover rounded terrible grinding squatmorning:

Well I see your point, and was expecting it... but again - even with me improving low bar squat 1RM by 20 kg or so... my high bar squat 1RM has remained at a the same grinding 140 kg if I'm lucky. And I feel like whenever I jump, off one leg or two legs, the amount of tension I get in those jumps at the knee level is the same tension I feel when I do high bar squats - they seem so specifically "connected" to each other. Oh, and it's the same tension or OVERLOAD should I say that I feel when I do half squats.

It's like I want to express the posterior chain strength that I have but I can't, because once that power reaches the knee level the quads can't stop it from going forward and collapsing. Combine that with my heavy bodyweight and calf weakness (as of late) - and you get useless posterior chain because it's like pushing in sand - the quads and calves give out and you lose all your "potential" power that the posterior chain is able to generate.

It's like pushing a ton of power on a pole in a pole vault but the pole is very weak at the middle and bends like crazy with no return of force... basically no stiffness whatsoever.

So despite the video that you put - I don't feel like my quads are doing substantial work out there at all - I just sink and control the descent in that squat using my glutes and hamstrings, where the quads are just pretty much isometrically "kinda" contracting.

I know how that sounds but that's what I feel. Can't describe it otherwise.

Again, to sum it up - the same overload I feel in the plant of a jump, regardless of technique, is the same overload I feel when I high bar squat. If I could work it out with the slower movement, which is the high bar squat - to make myself used to control that collapse that wants to happen - then that should translate into the jumps as well.

In the past I thought that maybe I'm just too quad dominant and training with the high bar squat is something that will make me even MORE quad dominant, and that the low bar squat would make sense in that situation - but now I'm starting to think otherwise.

If you look at any great two foot jumper - they all have their knees go way past the toes and the quad contribution in their jumps is tremendous. It doesn't mean I should be the same, but what it does mean is that I shouldn't have a problem getting in that position without collapsing. If I do, like I do now, then I just have sucky quads and they need to be improved.